Skip to main content

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: dr_calahan Date: Mar 25, 2010 7:20am
Forum: etree Subject: Archaic file naming, can we change this already?

I don't know about you guys, but the one thing preventing me from uploading my huge archive of master live recordings from some well known to unknown bands is the archaic file naming convention.

My first big gripe with the system is the archaic use of the CD format. Come on. Does anyone really burn CDs anymore? I think the vast majority listen on a streaming device, Portable Music player, their Squeezebox, Sonos, etc. Where burning is not required to listen.

Second, the format is a holdover from old school computer systems. We can make regular file names now that make sense.

Here is a system that I've been using:

Yes, it's longer, yes, there is an underscore, but hey, from the file name I can get everything I need. I don't need to look at a TXT file, which does not usually have the description of what each file name corresponds to each song. So I'm stuck, ok, Disc 2, Song 1 is actually Set 1 song 12 or something, way complicated. Why must it be so complicated. Just put the info in the file name and be done with it.

Are there file naming APPS out there, yea, but why should we need this? It's because the format is so archaic, hard to understand and comply with that you need a degree in Computer Science to figure it out.

Also, maybe I'm wrong and you can upload anything with any file naming convention. If this is the case, AWESOME, but my understanding is that will not allow me to upload something if it isn't named correctly.

Just my opinion!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grootna Date: Mar 28, 2010 2:28am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Archaic file naming, can we change this already?

I still burn CDs. I enjoy creating on-the-disc artwork for the live stuff and I give the CDs away to friends and family.

I suppose the disk number part of the filenames is what's bothering you. I don't need it - I can figure out how much will fit on a disk. What's important is a good setlist, so you know where to look for the breaks. Of course, you *can* just listen to the show...

So far as MP3 goes, I must've missed it when MP3 went lossless. Unless I didn't miss it, and MP3 is still lossy...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: xtifr Date: Mar 27, 2010 5:47pm
Forum: etree Subject: Better: start using flac metadata (tags), people! :)

As for CDs: not everyone has an MP3 player in their car, or a portable one with speakers for taking to the park or the beach. Not everyone has their MP3 player hooked up to their stereo, with the good speakers, and even if they do, they may not want to fill it with lossless format music, which takes a _lot_ more space.

As for names: as Greenone said, it's not critical (as long as they sort properly), but if you put the date first, then shows by different bands will be intermingled, and if you have subdirectories for each band, why do you need the band name in the title? :) In any case, band, title, venue, etc., are all information that belong in the metadata (the tags). When I'm browsing my music, I usually use a music player, so I don't even know or care what the file name is. And all the Archive formats except the horribly obsolete SHN support metadata/tags. If you're browsing your files trying to find a particular song, I have to say that I think you're doing it wrong.

All that said, I don't feel strongly about the filenames one way or the other, but to avoid confusion (and to avoid irritating people who are stuck in their ways), I think it might be better to start with the existing format, and add the extra data you want after the main filename, but before the extension, like:

{band abbr}{date}{disk#}{track#}{optional}.{ext}

Where {optional} can include venue, set, song title, mic info, or whatever you want. That should already be allowed, and should work for everyone.

Personally, I'm more interested in persuading people to start tagging their files properly before upload. The Archive fills in tags for the derived formats, but when I grab lossless files, I almost always have to tag it myself.

This post was modified by xtifr on 2010-03-28 00:47:45

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Detective John Carter of Mars Date: Mar 28, 2010 5:27am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Better: start using flac metadata (tags), people! :)

@tag it myself

what do you recommend for an easy program to do that?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hippie64 Date: Mar 28, 2010 5:59am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Better: start using flac metadata (tags), people! :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Detective John Carter of Mars Date: Mar 28, 2010 4:38pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Better: start using flac metadata (tags), people! :)


Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: greenone Date: Mar 25, 2010 12:45pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Archaic file naming, can we change this already?

You can name your files however you want. We recommend the etree naming convention to provide some sort of consistency (basically to prevent entire shows being labeled as "Track 01", "Track 02", "Track 03") but there are no restrictions whatsoever on file naming other than using the typical alphanumeric characters.

Any spaces, apostrophes, parentheses or brackets will be removed from file names, but as long as you keep things to A-Z, 0-9, periods, dashes and underscores, you'll be fine. Go crazy!

EDIT: You DO, however, need to include a .txt file of some sort. It's used to automatically populate the metadata editor (the blue screen) and is helpful for including source information and show/recording notes, which obviously wouldn't be included in the file name.

This post was modified by greenone on 2010-03-25 19:45:47